Dictatorial regimes and the U.S. use death penalty, why?

[jokmoth]

Why would the US want to be a part of this sad set of countries that use the death penalty?

North Korea
Saudi Arabia
Iran
China
USA
Syria

I think there are four strong reasons not to execute criminals, no matter what crime they committed:
The first is that you can not correct it afterwards if it should prove to be a mistake.

The second is that it affects the criminal's family members (eg, children) harder, because they are forced to live with the consequences the rest of their lives, although they usually are completely innocent.

The third is that it is completely illogical to kill someone as punishment for killing someone.

The fourth is that the death penalty is neither the worst retribution or the best cure. Dying is not the worst thing that can happen to a man, therefore it is not the worst possible punishment. And that cure is of course completely useless.

Would be interesting to hear from you americans how are pro-death penalty.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why? Because we were (and are) a frontier nation built on sustained violence and suppression of viciously brutal criminal elements.

 

[USNavyVet]

The only issue that I have with the death penalty is that it costs 10 times as much to execute someone as to give them life in prison. Other than that I see no issue.

 

[DGS49]

A few random points:

It is noteworthy that the general populations of almost every country favor the use of the death penalty against the most heinous criminals. In countries having parliamentary forms of government (most poignantly, Western Europe), the decision-makers tend to be far out of touch with the will of the majority on this issue because the peculiarities of that system. In the U.S., we have large chunks of the voting population who will cast their votes based on a single issue, if the candidate is considered to be "out of touch" on that issue. Thus, many politicians will "support" the death penalty because the cost of not supporting it can be dire. But the American public wants it, no doubt.

But, for example, England and Canada do not have the death penalty, but if it were up to popular vote, they would. So much for any claims of other countries disdaining the DP because they are "more civilized."

The cost of executing someone is next-to nothing. But the cost (and time commitment) of painfully dragging a capital case through the U.S. court system is so high that one can make a case for the ridiculous proposition that "...it costs 10 times as much to execute someone as to give them life in prison." This is of course ridiculous, as the cost of a bullet, fired by a full-time government employee, is less than the cost of a cup of coffee at Starbuck's. Indeed, the executing government could easily solicit unpaid volunteer shooters and use donated bullets from the general public, so that the cost of executions would be ZERO.

The history of the DP in the U.S. is a good (but not the best) illustration of the Progressive movement's campaign to destroy the U.S. Constitution by "interpreting" unwanted provisions out of existence. The Founding Fathers clearly intended to have the DP as a valid sanction by government. The Fifth Amendment, ratified in 1791, refers to "capital" crimes (i.e., crimes punishable by death), and states that no person shall be deprived of life, without due process of law. The corollary obviously being that a person MAY be deprived of life WITH due process of law. Similarly, the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, states that no person may be deprived of life without due process.

Clearly, the Constitution provides for the death penalty, and it would have to be Amended for it NOT to permit the death penalty. But Progressive judges and justices since the '30's have incessantly set up roadblocks to the actual implementation of DP statutes, with the result that the statutes are tightly constrained, the procedures are mind-numbing, the mandatory appeals are almost perpetual, and the very idea that the DP might be a general deterrent to anything is nothing but a pathetic joke. It is only in jurisdictions like Texas, where they emphatically work to ensure that the DP remains "viable," that any executions can take place at all.

But this is not due to any groundswell of public opinion to eliminate the DP, just the pain that EVERYONE has to endure when a state decides to actually execute someone.

I have personally given up, and would support a constitutional amendment to kill it (sorry for the choice of words). I would be willing to forego the few executions that actually take place in order to:

--> tell the ACLU to STFU on the issue,
--> Save the states the money of the perpetual appeals, and to
--> eliminate the extremely slim possibility that we might actually execute an innocent person.

But keep in mind...there is not a single case in the past 75 years when an executed defendant has been proven innocent of the crime for which he was executed. This remains true despite a massive campaign to find such cases, and to spread disinformation to the public on this non-existent "problem."

 

[martybegan]

Why would the US want to be a part of this sad set of countries that use the death penalty?

North Korea
Saudi Arabia
Iran
China
USA
Syria

I think there are four strong reasons not to execute criminals, no matter what crime they committed:
The first is that you can not correct it afterwards if it should prove to be a mistake.

The second is that it affects the criminal's family members (eg, children) harder, because they are forced to live with the consequences the rest of their lives, although they usually are completely innocent.

The third is that it is completely illogical to kill someone as punishment for killing someone.

The fourth is that the death penalty is neither the worst retribution or the best cure. Dying is not the worst thing that can happen to a man, therefore it is not the worst possible punishment. And that cure is of course completely useless.

Would be interesting to hear from you americans how are pro-death penalty.

1. Considering people stay on death row for 10+ years, that is plenty of time to figure out if a mistake was made. and being let out after finding a mistake after 20+ years isnt a picnic either.

2. You can use the same argument to be against incarceration alltogether.

3. The punishment fits the crime is a natural human reaction to said crime, and completely logical, to a point. Cruel and unusual punishment prevents the rape of rapists as a legal cure, but we make people pay back what they stole, and we remove the freedom of people who have broken the law. killing someone who kills is not a stretch at all.

4. Death is the worst thing that can happen to you, much worse than 3 hots and a cot for the rest of your life.